DINENDRO MULLICK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the owner of premises No. 8, Esplanade Row East, in Calcutta, situate within the Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction of this Court. In July 1927, he created a mortgage in favour of the Imperial Bank of India, by deposit of title deeds relating to the property for money lent.

(2.) By a registered agreement dated 7-2-1938, made between the mortgagor and the Bank, two Receivers were appointed to take possession of the premises and realise the rents and profits thereof. By another agreement dated 22-12-1938, one of the Receivers was discharged and another appointed in his place, with like powers.

(3.) In 1939, the Defence of India Act was passed and rules made thereunder. Rule 75A of the Defence of India Rules empowered the Government of India to requisition any property, movable or immovable, if that was needed for the maintenance of public order or the efficient prosecution of the war. But if the Government requisitioned a property, it was liable to pay compensation, the amount of compensation being determined under the provisions of Section 19, Defence of India Act. That section, so far as relevant, is as follows : "(1) Where by or under any rule made under this Act any action is taken of the nature described in sub-s. (2) of Section 299, Government of India Act, 1935, there shall be paid compensation, the amount of which shall be determined in the manner, and in accordance with the principles, hereinafter set out, that is to say- (a) Where the amount of compensation can be fixed by Agreement, it shall be paid in accordance with such agreement. (b) Where no such agreement can be reached, the Central Government shall appoint as arbitrator a person qualified under sub-s. (3) of Section 220 of the above mentioned Act for appointment as a Judge of a High Court. * * * * *